The political landscape has reached a level of surrealism that defies all logic: former President Cristina Kirchner, with a firm sentence upheld by the Supreme Court and under house arrest, seeks to position herself as the great moral and economic prosecutor of Javier Milei's government. The hypocrisy of this stance does not lie in her right to an opinion, but in the vast chasm separating her 'people's defender' rhetoric from the criminal reality that confines her. It is a display of political cynicism where, while serving a six-year prison sentence and a perpetual disqualification for defrauding the state in the 'Vialidad' case, the former president uses social media to lecture on transparency and public management. In her recent posts, the former vice president labels the libertarian administration a 'tragedy in installments' and mocks economic indicators with a nonchalance that ignores her own legacy of institutional degradation and plundering the public treasury. This digital hyperactivity is nothing more than a media distraction tactic designed to shift focus from a corruption conviction to an epic narrative of political persecution or 'lawfare.' It is a profound disrespect to collective memory and the intelligence of the average citizen, whom she was convicted of redirecting public funds to enrich business partners and powerful friends, only to now present herself as the ethical bulwark against economic adjustment. The desperate attempt to turn a conviction into a 'certificate of dignity' is the last refuge of a leadership that refuses to accept that, after years of due process, the Justice system has finally exposed its matrix of illicit enrichment at the public's expense. It is particularly aggravating to observe how, in each post criticizing falling consumption or poverty levels, she deliberately omits that the structural damage caused by the corruption she led is precisely one of the factors that has most limited the state's capacity to respond for decades. In this context, the 'queen of X' seems to believe that building a digital narrative can nullify the weight of evidence collected in judicial files, but the reality is that her words today lack truth and relevance. In this light, seeing a former president convicted of plundering the state denounce a supposed 'plundering' of Argentines' pockets is the ultimate expression of a hypocrisy that 'likes' can no longer hide. It is the voice that emerges today from confinement and an ankle bracelet, lacking the minimal moral authority needed to guide a society that is still trying to recover from the ruins left by her administration. Despite claiming that 'history' had absolved her, the truth, like justice, has spoken, and no social media post can restore the credibility of one who traded the well-being of millions for the benefit of a few corrupt.
